[pastry_chef]

Here is a note about the virtues of a solid roller.

Intake RX lobe 4305
261 @ .050
179 @ .200
.431 lobe lift.

Exhaust NC lobe 4145
262 @ .050
183 @ .200
.421 lobe lift.

Same centerlines as post 19. Valve lash .020 , same 1.6 rockers.
Superior output from 1500 RPM (far left) to 6200 RPM.

Attached images, the lighter colors are the solid roller.
Green is TQ. The other is net valve lift curves, notice the solid roller has less overlap. Red traces are the intakes.

[nmoreilly]

Originally Posted by pastry_chef

Here is a note about the virtues of a solid roller.

Intake RX lobe 4305
261 @ .050
179 @ .200
.431 lobe lift.

Exhaust NC lobe 4145
262 @ .050
183 @ .200
.421 lobe lift.

Same centerlines as post 19. Valve lash .020 , same 1.6 rockers.
Superior output from 1500 RPM (far left) to 6200 RPM.

Attached images, the lighter colors are the solid roller.
Green is TQ. The other is net valve lift curves, notice the solid roller has less overlap. Red traces are the intakes.

In both cases, does lowering the exhaust duration help with the low RPM bucking, surging (reversion). ?

[pastry_chef]

Originally Posted by nmoreilly

In both cases, does lowering the exhaust duration help with the low RPM bucking, surging (reversion). ?

Need to watch the lobe centerlines as well but if the exhaust duration is reduced too far it hurts top end power.

[Steve C.]

The heads will thrive on high valve lift.

0.592" lift is not a lot knowing those heads are well ported for the claimed 360 cfm and that is probably at 0.700" lift. Many years ago when I bought my set of High Port castings they were claiming the heads AT THAT TIME had flow numbers starting at 340 cfm not ported. In reality they were closer to 330 at .700" lift with a SCE 128103 gasket. That gasket has a port opening about 2.320" tall despite what the SCE catalog states.

We ported my HP castings to 403 or 415 cfm depending on the bench, good numbers 14 years ago. Supporting 910 hp.


.

[nmoreilly]

Originally Posted by nmoreilly

Thanks! Definitely think a bit more lift. Will let you know what we decide to go with

Went with your suggestion on the HR cam and works as you suggested producing virtually identical hp/tq numbers at same RPM. The issue now is that comp 857 lifters have failed - 4 of them at this point- after driving and chassis dyno testing. I know the hybrid setup is been discussed a lot but wondering if solid lifters would work with this cam. Really running out of other ideas at this point

Thanks in advance

[nmoreilly]

Originally Posted by pastry_chef

My hyd roller suggestion with Comp lobes
Dynomation 6 says it will do what you want. A bit more lift than your previous cam

Intake lobe 13459 (QXI)
305 adv
253 @ .050
174 @ .200
.399 lobe lift

Exhaust lobe 13486 (QXX)
309 adv
255 @ .050
174 @ .200
.389 lobe lift

114 LSA , install intake at 108 centerline.

Went with your suggestion on the HR cam and works as you suggested producing virtually identical hp/tq numbers at same RPM. The issue now is that comp 857 lifters have failed - 4 of them at this point- after driving and chassis dyno testing. I know the hybrid setup is been discussed a lot but wondering if solid lifters would work with this cam. Really running out of other ideas at this point

Thanks in advance

[pastry_chef]

Originally Posted by nmoreilly

the HR cam and works as you suggested producing virtually identical hp/tq numbers at same RPM

PM sent.

[ponjohn]

Originally Posted by nmoreilly

Went with your suggestion on the HR cam and works as you suggested producing virtually identical hp/tq numbers at same RPM. The issue now is that comp 857 lifters have failed - 4 of them at this point- after driving and chassis dyno testing. I know the hybrid setup is been discussed a lot but wondering if solid lifters would work with this cam. Really running out of other ideas at this point

Thanks in advance

How much power did it make?

Ported high ports?